Allow TINPEX to be +7 difficulty

[Rudra]

13 hours ago, DrRocket said:

There is gradual evolution, you see requirements like you stated for any star TFs, and folks choose if they want to bite or not. I still see a few folks running TINPEX at +4 difficulty, I exclusively now run at +5 and have no restrictions on how the pug is composed, and I have not been burnt yet and usually complete under 36 min.

 

I imagine trying at +6 and +7 may require experience, trial and error, and maybe a little focus on group composition or T4 status, since there is only a +1 level shift for TINPEX, I really do not see the benefit of having other T4 needs, since there would be no additional level shift benefit. Several issues ago the alpha requirement for TINPEX was removed, and I can't remember presently anyone demanding alpha slots, at least I do not.

 

In short players and tactics evolve, and things will work out. I can't say for +7 it will require a legendary team to do it, but I neither can say it wont require it; it is one of those things experience will tell.

 

Also before you continue casting stones at leaders, I suggest you give it a try at leading, and then feel free to criticize all you like...

The part you keep ignoring, and I have to assume you are ignoring it because you have already been told this twice (thrice if you count @Troo's reminder to read the other), is that the point of the +5, +6, and +7 is to bring back the +4 difficulty that incarnates effectively took away. So the whole point is to re-enable +4 difficulty at actual +4 rather than +4-1 (or -2 or -3) for incarnate shifts. That means your request for Apex and Tin Mage to be able to go to +7 ignoring lack of incarnate shifts would be unique (despite applied to 2 different TFs) among all the game's content.

 

Again, the apparent goal was to restore +4 difficulty after available player level shifts have been accounted for, not to provide higher than +4 difficulty for game content. And most definitely not to provide higher than +4 difficulty for just two specific TFs as you are asking for.

 

Edit: And to make sure this is absolutely clear, we're going to do some math. Currently, Apex and Tin Mage allow for level 55 enemies and they do not allow the incarnate shifts, just the Alpha shift (for 50+1).

55 - 51 (50+1) = 4

If Apex and Tin Mage were changed to allow the +7 difficulty, they would now allow the incarnate shifts as well so players could be level 50+3.

57 - 53 (50+3) = 4

Net result? You would be getting what you already have.

 

Edited Saturday at 06:01 PM by Rudra

[Ghost]

5 hours ago, DrRocket said:

 

 

Also before you continue casting stones at leaders, I suggest you give it a try at leading, and then feel free to criticize all you like...

 

Ive led many PUG TFs, and I do it without putting unnecessarily elitist restrictions on players.  

But as I've said in other posts, I enjoy challenges (and running TFs that take longer than 36min).

 

So I guess that means I CAN criticize all I want.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited Saturday at 09:42 AM by Ghost

[Ghost]

3 hours ago, DrRocket said:

knock it off, it happens for any TF with a star and it is not that ridiculous

That is my point.

It's become the norm because players think that it's the ONLY way to complete it.

 

 

[srmalloy]

10 hours ago, DrRocket said:

knock it off, it happens for any TF with a star and it is not that ridiculous

It's a crutch. Rotating T4 Barrier spamming allows PUGs running multi-star TFs to complete the TF without actually having to be able to coordinate as a team (which defines the vast majority of 8 random people thrown together to run higher-difficulty content; you can't expect everyone to understand how all the power combinations work together), so CoH, which went its entire live run without them, grew gear checks.

[DrRocket]

12 hours ago, Rudra said:

The part you keep ignoring, and I have to assume you are ignoring it because you have already been told this twice (thrice if you count @Troo's reminder to read the other), is that the point of the +5, +6, and +7 is to bring back the +4 difficulty that incarnates effectively took away. So the whole point is to re-enable +4 difficulty at actual +4 rather than +4-1 (or -2 or -3) for incarnate shifts. That means your request for Apex and Tin Mage to be able to go to +7 ignoring lack of incarnate shifts would be unique (despite applied to 2 different TFs) among all the game's content.

 

Again, the apparent goal was to restore +4 difficulty after available player level shifts have been accounted for, not to provide higher than +4 difficulty for game content. And most definitely not to provide higher than +4 difficulty for just two specific TFs as you are asking for.

 

Edit: And to make sure this is absolutely clear, we're going to do some math. Currently, Apex and Tin Mage allow for level 55 enemies and they do not allow the incarnate shifts, just the Alpha shift (for 50+1).

55 - 51 (50+1) = 4

If Apex and Tin Mage were changed to allow the +7 difficulty, they would now allow the incarnate shifts as well so players could be level 50+3.

57 - 53 (50+3) = 4

Net result? You would be getting what you already have.

 

I believe, I addressed your summary, even stated we would be 51s fighting 57s, can you try, to stop telling us the blindingly obvious?

 

I been hearing, all too often  you standard negative attitude, I made it clear to ignore all the excuses and simply allow for the higher difficulty, how much simpler can that get?

[Rudra]

2 minutes ago, DrRocket said:

I believe, I addressed your summary, even stated we would be 51s fighting 57s, can you try, to stop telling us the blindingly obvious?

 

I been hearing, all too often  you standard negative attitude, I made it clear to ignore all the excuses and simply allow for the higher difficulty, how much simpler can that get?

Try reading the entirety of my post. Either Tin Mage and Apex are made incarnate content so you can use the +7 level difficulty, which still leaves you fighting +4 mobs, not +6, or you are asking for two TFs to treat the difficulty settings differently than the rest of the game. And in the latter case, why would the devs agree to do that?

[DrRocket]

11 hours ago, Ghost said:

That is my point.

It's become the norm because players think that it's the ONLY way to complete it.

 

 

There is a balance point at this, if you try to form a team to do a TF and you start putting conditions, you guarantee that recruiting will take a very long time or never having enough people to signup, as oppose to how quickly a regular +4 TF, such as I see happening with ITF were I am seeing about an even distribution of +4 and +5s. When I run TINPEX at plus 5, I have no issue as compared recruiting at +4. Do I expect longer recruiting for +6 and +7, of course I do but it hardly can be construed as impossible and impractical, and once the +7 starts getting smashed, recruitment will increase.  I do recognize that 4 star ITFs happen extremely rarely and the +4 standard ITF is regular, it does make your point, but the choice is there to be made, and that choice is what I am asking for TINPEX and despite the cadre of you, I am not the only one who wants tihs choice.

[Rudra]

1 hour ago, DrRocket said:

as oppose to how quickly a regular +4 TF, such as I see happening with ITF were I am seeing about an even distribution of +4 and +5s.

Funny thing. I am in a 4-star Advanced Mode ITF with my difficulty settings at +7. And there are no level 56s anywhere on the map. (Edit again: Let alone 57s. Everything is level 55.) I call BS. (Edit: Yes, I only snuck my way through the first mission to check. I have no intentions of trying to solo a +5 4-star ITF.)

 

Edited Saturday at 09:17 PM by Rudra